Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, July 16, 2007
Suzanne Fields :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Best Parent
by Suzanne Fields
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
What was the biggest suprise of Election Day?



Divorce is good mostly for the lawyers. They make a lot of money from divorces, working out alimony, child support and custody while the meter keeps ticking. These issues are never easy to resolve, but the "best" divorces are those where the parents can keep the best interest of the child always in sharp focus.

That's always more difficult when rancor trumps reason and the concerns of the children give way to spite and ego, and a spouse's anger with the other surpasses sensitivity and common sense. This is the stuff of countless books and movies. The literature begins with Medea, who murdered her children to punish her husband. Less spiteful parents impose softer gradations of suffering on children when a marriage fails. It doesn't have to be so. Customs, like time, can change.

"Blended" family holidays are increasing, where remarried husbands and wives with a mixture of children celebrate together. Divorced parents share summer houses (hopefully at separate times) so that their children can enjoy an extended stay in the same house where they've developed friendships and familiarity.

But lurid headlines about "deadbeat dads" still identify delinquent parents who refuse to pay child support, even when affluence puts no strain on pocketbooks. Circumstances always alter cases, but David Levy, director of the Children's Rights Council, blames a social system that emphasizes the importance of financial support without focusing nearly the attention that emotional support should get. When child support laws began to tighten in the 1980s, fathers were often kept out of the child's life. Fathers weren't needed, but their dollars were.

"The country saw wage withholding, liens against property, interception of federal and state tax returns, publication of 'most wanted' lists of child-support delinquents, and arrests in the middle of the night, where dads were handcuffed in their pajamas and hauled off to court," Mr. Levy says. Sometimes this was warranted; many angry men were in fact withholding support because their wives were withholding access to their children.

"Men were offended by the idea that a woman could initiate divorce, obtain custody and support, and reduce the father to the role of Disneyland Daddy in his own child's life," he says. Fathers saw themselves unfairly treated, and some of them organized the Children's Rights Council to lobby Congress for joint custody laws and for what's called "shared parenting" -- one parent may be held responsible for financial support but both parents are held responsible for emotional support. Children's rights, as fathers argued before congressional committees, meant fathers' rights, too.

Joint custody, like sole custody, can work well or not at all. What matters is the mental health of the parents and the quality of child-parent relationships. Needs can often change with a child's age.

While one size does not fit all, it's difficult to object to an increased emphasis on shared parenting for divorced parents. This doesn't necessarily mean equal time, but an amicable commitment of time and cooperation. Governments spend $4 billion a year to collect financial support but only $109 million annually on parenting education, counseling, mediation and other things.

The emotional benefits stemming from a parent's psychological participation in a child's life are harder to measure than the benefits paid for by hard cash. Mr. Levy objects to such a facile interpretation. "The lack of two parents in a child's life is the most significant fact producing more crime, drugs, lack of school performance, and teenage pregnancy in young people," he says. Such data has been used in campaigns to foster fatherhood in single parent families, but he doesn't think enough has been said on behalf of those fathers of divorce who remain vulnerable to vindictive wives. Preliminary data even suggests that certain states with high joint custody rates have lower divorce rates, suggesting that if you can't get your "ex" out of your life maybe you might as well consider reconciliation. This might be the greatest benefit of all for the kids.

The Children's Rights Council has become more mainstream -- perhaps even mellower -- than when it was founded 20 years ago, reflecting the mellowing of feminists who sought "liberation" from the home, directing venom at men and delivering it through the children. Divorce has declined or flattened since as post-feminism attitudes have revived the importance of family life for both men and women. It's difficult to find someone to disagree with the council's mantra: "The Best Parent is Both Parents." How to accomplish that is another matter. We'll be working on that for as long as children are the rewards of marriage.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Suzanne Fields is a columnist with The Washington Times.

Be the first to read Suzanne Fields' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate
The Problem is With Court's Money
The problem is that the court looses money if it rules for joint custody.

Read Title IV-D. Courts make more money in federal dollars if they collect more in child support.

If dads and moms are watching their kids directly, then they're not paying each other to watch them, and they're spending their money directly on their kids, rather than through a court order child support order to the other parent.

Many courts openly violate state laws to find ways to prevent joint custody. In Michigan, the Oakland County Friend of the Court does this:

Oakland County Friend of Court Ignores Law and Hurts Kids

The Oakland County Friend of the Court is harming children by ignoring Michigan law by mixing mediation investigation, and referee duties in the family counselor position.

Children are harmed in two ways.

Firstly, family counselors, who are not lawyers, make custody recommendations based on statements and evidence gathered without the conventional courtroom safeguards in violation of the Friend of the Court Act and other laws. Parents can make false allegations or offer false evidence without any consequences. Oakland County FOC should not make custody decisions based on which parent can lie the best.

Secondly, parents are not given the opportunity for meaningful and confidential mediation, but rather are thrust into a combative atmosphere. The law requires the FOC to offer voluntary neutral and confidential mediators, because studies and common sense say that if the parents can make a rational agreement, it's probably the best option for them and their kids. Instead, family counselors make snap judgments and stick kids into cookie cutter custody arrangements such as "liberal and reasonable parenting time", when that may or may not be what's best them or their parents.

An original job description from Oakland County as well as my amateur legal analysis (I am a concerned citizen; not a lawyer) are available below. More information is available at the Oakland County Friend of the Court website here (another amateur legal analysis is available):

http://www.oakgov.com/foc/

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: XXX
To: XXXX
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2006 11:51:40 PM
Subject: Re: [XXX] Anyone looking for a job?

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advise, but in my lay person's opinion, the position listed violates the following Michigan Court Rules and Michigan Law in the following ways:

Firstly, I doubt that a direct hire is legal here. The Friend of the Court Act 552.513 Domestic relations mediation, says in part:

(1) The office shall provide, either directly or by contract, domestic relations mediation to assist the parties in settling voluntarily a dispute concerning child custody or parenting time that arises in a friend of the court case. Parties shall not be required to meet with a domestic relations mediator. The service may be provided directly by the office only if such a service is in place on July 1, 1983, if the service is not available from a private source, or if the court can demonstrate that providing the service within the friend of the court office is cost beneficial. Any expansion of existing services provided by the court on July 1, 1983 shall be provided by an individual meeting the domestic relations mediator minimum qualifications listed under subsection (4).

Counseling is obviously available from many private sources in Oakland County. I doubt that the court has a study on file showing that the service within the FOC office is beneficial, particularly one conducted by an independent party.

This family counselor "provides mediation". However, he or she also "conducts investigations". By mixing the investigative and the mediation duties, the Oakland County FOC appears to force parties to meet with family counselors, and thus with mediators, in apparent violation of the paragraph above.

Paragraphs 2 and 3 make this more clear, by requiring strict confidentiality from mediators:

(2) If an agreement is reached by the parties through domestic relations mediation, a consent order incorporating the agreement shall be prepared by an employee of the office who is a member of the state bar of Michigan; under section 22, by a member of the state bar of Michigan; or by the attorney for 1 of the parties. The consent order shall be provided to, and shall be entered by, the court.

If no agreement is reached, then there is no consent order, and the counselor, who is probably not a member of the state bar, can't work with the member of the state bar or either attorney to draw up the agreement. However, this family counselor (mediator) "prepares written recommendations regarding custody, parenting time and related matters for review and determination by a Friend of the Court Referee and/or
a Family Division Judge." Mediators should never do that! It violates confidentiality. Even if they were to communicate with anyone, they should only communicate with a member of the state bar or an attorney - not the court directly, yet that's exactly what the job description says that they do!

(3) Except as provided in subsection (2), a communication between a domestic relations mediator and a party to a domestic relations mediation is confidential. The secrecy of the communication shall be preserved inviolate as a privileged communication. The communication shall not be admitted in evidence in any proceedings. The same protection shall be given to communications between the parties in the presence of the mediator.

Well, if a mediator is conducting an investigation and making recommendations that go before a Referee or Judge, then there is no way that communications with this person can be reasonably considered "confidential".

If the State of Michigan didn't make it clear enough that they didn't want mediators to be investigators too, they added MCL 552.515 Section 15, Performance by mediator of certain functions involving party prohibited:

An employee of the office who performs domestic relations mediation in a friend of the court case involving a particular party shall not perform referee functions, investigation and recommendation functions, or enforcement functions as to any domestic relations matter involving that party.

So a family counselor that "provides mediation" cannot also "conducts investigations". But that's exactly what the advertisement below says the job is!

In Oakland County, Family Counselors act as mediators. Family Counselors are assigned to a single team with a given the judge - judge has one mediator who works for him or her. However, MCR 3.216 "Domestic Relations Mediation". It says in part:

Rule 3.216 Domestic Relations Mediation
(A) Scope and Applicability of Rule, Definitions.
(1) All domestic relations cases, as defined in MCL 552.502(h), are subject to
mediation under this rule, unless otherwise provided by statute or court rule.
(2) Domestic relations mediation is a nonbinding process in which a neutral
third party facilitates communication between parties to promote settlement. If
the parties so request, and the mediator agrees to do so, the mediator may
provide a written recommendation for settlement of any issues that remain
unresolved at the conclusion of a mediation proceeding. This procedure, known
as evaluative mediation, is governed by subrule (I).
...
(B) Mediation Plan. Each trial court that submits domestic relations cases to
mediation under this rule shall include in its alternative dispute resolution plan
adopted under MCR 2.410(B) provisions governing selection of domestic relations
mediators, and for providing parties with information about mediation in the family
division as soon as reasonably practical.

Look at MCR 2.410, which says in part:

(B) ADR Plan.
(1) Each trial court that submits cases to ADR processes under this rule shall
adopt an ADR plan by local administrative order. The plan must be in writing
and available to the public in the ADR clerk's office.
(2) At a minimum, the ADR plan must:
(a) designate an ADR clerk, who may be the clerk of the court, the court
administrator, the assignment clerk, or some other person;
(b) if the court refers cases to mediation under MCR 2.411, specify how the
list of persons available to serve as mediators will be maintained and the
system by which mediators will be assigned from the list under MCR
2.411(B)(3);
(c) include provisions for disseminating information about the operation of
the court's ADR program to litigants and the public; and

If Family Counselors are assigned to a judge (they are - see the Oakland County Friend of the Court web site), then the there is no ADR plan. If Family Counselors are direct hires and permanently assigned, then the ADR clerk can't do his or her job. There is no list of qualified persons. All of the rules regarding mediation are then ignored.

Sincerely,

XXXX

----- Original Message ----
From: XXXXX
To: XXXX
Sent: XXX
Subject: [XXX] Anyone looking for a job?

or better yet, does anyone know why there is a vacancy?

Job Order Number: 2498563 Job last updated: October 03, 2006

Company name: OAKLAND COUNTY PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT
Product line/service: Services
Web site: http://www.oakgov. com

Job title: FRIEND OF COURT-FAMILY COUNSELOR CLOSING 10-2-06
Job type: Full Time
Hours per week: 40
Job(s) available: 1

Job location: Pontiac



Job description: JOB NO: 100933 SALARY: BI-WEEKLY: $1,922-$2,515
DESCRIPTION OF WORK Under general supervision, provides mediation to
assist parties in domestic relations matters filed with the Circuit
Court in order to voluntarily resolve disputes involving child
custody and/or parenting time. Conducts court ordered home
investigations and office interviews in order to gather economic and
environmental information concerning parties in divorce, separation
or paternity proceedings involving minor dependent children.
Summarizes and analyzes gathered information and prepares written
recommendations regarding custody, parenting time and related matters
for review and determination by a Friend of the Court Referee and/or
a Family Division Judge. Provides crisis and dispute resolution
counseling to educate parents about the effects of separation and
divorce and assists them in generating alternative solutions
regarding custody and parenting time issues.



Additional requirements: MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS At the time of
application, applicants must: 1. Possess a Master's degree from an
accredited college or university with a major in Psychology,
Counseling, Social Work or closely related field; AND 2. Have had at
least two (2) years of full time experience in family counseling; AND
3. Possess a valid motor vehicle chauffeur's or operator's license.
NOTE: Applicants must bring a valid, unexpired driver?s license in
order to be admitted to any portion of the examination/ appointment
process. Volunteer experience may be accepted provided it is
equivalent in level and scope to the required experience. At the time
of application, applicants must have an official transcript sent
directly to the Human Resources Department. Applicants will not be
certified until such documentation has been received and evaluated
CANDIDATES APPOINTED TO ANY POSITION WITH OAKLAND COUNTY MUST, PRIOR
TO THE FIRST DAY OF WORK, PROVIDE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS AS REQUIRED
UND

Directions to business: WORK LOCATION 1200 North Telegraph Road,
Pontiac, MI 48341 Department/etc: Oakland County Circuit Court/Friend
of the Court, 230 Elizabeth Lake Rd., Pontiac, MI 48341
Please apply by Phone, by Mail, in person or by Website .

Contact: WEB SITE WEB SITE Business name: OAKLAND COUNTY PERSONNEL
DEPARTMENT
Phone: (248)858-0530 Address: 1200 North Telegraph Road
Fax: Pontiac, MI 48341
Email:
Web site: http://www.oakgov. com



Misguided
Ms. Wallerstein "stories" aside, the actual data refutes her "interviews". Ms. Wallerstein study focused on a small group from a very homogeneous pool of interviewees. Simply put, her anecdotal study was not only overtly subjective, it was heavily flawed.

What we do know from numerous studies, although Shared Parentiing is not the norm, when it is implemented children suffer many less social ills then their unfortunate peers from sole custody arrangements. The studies are plentiful and easy to find if you so desire.

All the studies aside, I can't imagine why anyone would think that two homes would be more disruptive than losing a regular parent? How is it possible to agree with Ms. Wallerstein's position unless you are dismissive of Fathers? Think about it...you and Ms. Wallerstein want us to believe that having a Dad who you probably interact with daily, but then suddenly only see a couple a few days a month, is less harmful than having to live in two homes. Despite any so-called research, it is inconceivable to me that a sane person would fall for this tripe.

As quoted, Ms. Wallerstein's "interviews" also led her to testify in California that a Mother moving a child to another state is in the best interest of a child if it is in the best interest of the Mother. In other words, this woman believes that a child doesn't even need a Father who "visits" every couple of weeks. She's fine with a couple of "visits" a year.

Your use of words such as "football" and "car keys" is right from the feminist handbook. Children are not objects. They are human beings who form strong emotional bonds with two parents. This bond is not elastic and can be broken when one parent is turned into a "visitor". Talk about "emotionally disruptive"...having to live in two homes pales in comparsion to losing a parent.

As I've noted, my children live in three homes. Growing up, my family had a cabin on a lake, so I lived in two homes too. Didn't matter a whit...because I had two parents and that trumped any "disruption" caused by having to live in a couple of houses.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.